1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
|
Received: from sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.194]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <mh.in.england@gmail.com>) id 1YLuC6-0002s0-M9
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Thu, 12 Feb 2015 13:52:38 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
designates 209.85.212.173 as permitted sender)
client-ip=209.85.212.173; envelope-from=mh.in.england@gmail.com;
helo=mail-wi0-f173.google.com;
Received: from mail-wi0-f173.google.com ([209.85.212.173])
by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1YLuC4-00076G-Ks
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Thu, 12 Feb 2015 13:52:38 +0000
Received: by mail-wi0-f173.google.com with SMTP id bs8so4457048wib.0
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Thu, 12 Feb 2015 05:52:30 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.194.61.145 with SMTP id p17mr7565639wjr.35.1423749150637;
Thu, 12 Feb 2015 05:52:30 -0800 (PST)
Sender: mh.in.england@gmail.com
Received: by 10.194.188.11 with HTTP; Thu, 12 Feb 2015 05:52:30 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CAE28kUQrOVn4F6BZsz0vfmVjKRnaycqXuwBwyXODDT0upzLZ2A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20150212064719.GA6563@savin.petertodd.org>
<CANEZrP2uVT_UqJbzyQcEbiS78T68Jj2cH7OGXv5QtYiCwArDdA@mail.gmail.com>
<CAE28kUQ87jWhq1p6RK1eKEuEP1ERxN_P2SS0=YsFEGAqRyMPLA@mail.gmail.com>
<CANEZrP2H2T2QFZceCc=YzwwiApJy7kY7FN0LoAZODGbW12SYsw@mail.gmail.com>
<CAE28kUQrOVn4F6BZsz0vfmVjKRnaycqXuwBwyXODDT0upzLZ2A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2015 14:52:30 +0100
X-Google-Sender-Auth: 04A1Y03Mtj-VoOmQNlpkgvWBldE
Message-ID: <CANEZrP3hkBGRi+T42b-wXSwiM4kGxqwr9XapJ3_EWwo2dKy+0g@mail.gmail.com>
From: Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net>
To: Alex Mizrahi <alex.mizrahi@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7bacc0f25f8805050ee46e0e
X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
-1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for
sender-domain
0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider
(mh.in.england[at]gmail.com)
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature,
not necessarily valid
-0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature
X-Headers-End: 1YLuC4-00076G-Ks
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] replace-by-fee v0.10.0rc4
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2015 13:52:38 -0000
--047d7bacc0f25f8805050ee46e0e
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> 1. They won't be attacking Bitcoin, they will attack merchants who accept
> payments with 0 confirmations.
>
Which is basically all of them other than exchanges. Any merchant that uses
BitPay or Coinbase, for instance, or any physical shop.
If you want to play word games and redefine "Bitcoin" to be something other
than what people are actually using, go right ahead. You will win the
argument under your own definitions which nobody else is using.
In your scenario I won't be able to get hamburgers for free because people
will stop selling them for ordinary bitcoin transactions. Most will say,
you know what, just pay me with Visa instead. And a few might knuckle down
and set up some network of PKI-like trusted third parties that interacts
with the block chain in some way.
Though eventually, if that were to happen, cunning merchants will notice
that having received a transaction counter-signed by a TTP they don't
actually have to broadcast it or pay miner fees at all. They can just keep
it around in their wallet and pass it along to the next guy when they
purchase something with those coins. Eventually whoever ends up not being
able to find a matching TTP gets to be the sucker who pays all the miner
fees at once, because he is the only one who actually needs their services.
--047d7bacc0f25f8805050ee46e0e
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><blo=
ckquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #c=
cc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div=
class=3D"gmail_quote"><div>1. They won't be attacking Bitcoin, they wi=
ll attack merchants who accept payments with 0 confirmations.</div></div></=
div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Which is basically all of them o=
ther than exchanges. Any merchant that uses BitPay or Coinbase, for instanc=
e, or any physical shop.</div><div><br></div><div>If you want to play word =
games and redefine "Bitcoin" to be something other than what peop=
le are actually using, go right ahead. You will win the argument under your=
own definitions which nobody else is using.=C2=A0</div><div><br></div><div=
>In your scenario I won't be able to get hamburgers for free because pe=
ople will stop selling them for ordinary bitcoin transactions. Most will sa=
y, you know what, just pay me with Visa instead. And a few might knuckle do=
wn and set up some network of PKI-like trusted third parties that interacts=
with the block chain in some way.</div><div><br></div><div>Though eventual=
ly, if that were to happen, cunning merchants will notice that having recei=
ved a transaction counter-signed by a TTP they don't actually have to b=
roadcast it or pay miner fees at all. They can just keep it around in their=
wallet and pass it along to the next guy when they purchase something with=
those coins. Eventually whoever ends up not being able to find a matching =
TTP gets to be the sucker who pays all the miner fees at once, because he i=
s the only one who actually needs their services.</div></div></div></div>
--047d7bacc0f25f8805050ee46e0e--
|
